The Game Show Forum
The Game Show Forum => The Big Board => Topic started by: JasonA1 on June 19, 2023, 02:03:47 PM
-
https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/jack-barry-as-host-of-the-nbc-twenty-one-tv-game-show-news-photo/177997147
Here's a photo of a different set for Twenty One than I've ever seen on video. The pilot's on YouTube, and has "SPONSOR" in place of Geritol's name everywhere, so that's not the explanation. The date of "circa 1957" doesn't offer certainty this was from later in the run, but it certainly could have been. Anybody have any insight?
-Jason
-
Circa 1957 could mean earlier than that, so maybe runthroughs to see how various things would look on stage and on-camera. (The fact that the scoreboards were on the front of the booths indicates that they got that right.) I can’t imagine holding a steady shot on a challenger but you can’t see her score but when we get a close-up on Jack we get a pair of scores with no context.
-
In this picture the booths are facing inward towards each other, so having the scoreboards on the booths wouldn't work for that design. Heck, nothing about Twenty One works with that design.
-
I've had a chance to view some kinescopes that aren't out in the wild, and I can pinpoint the date on this one; this is September 26, 1956, the third episode of the series. The original isolation booths were ENORMOUS and based on the angles of the close-ups, and based on the way the wide shot of the set was framed on the actual show, it appears that either the camera operators were physically inside the booths with the contestants, or they had a peek-a-boo window on the side of the booth for the lens of the camera to shoot through.
-
Neat! Thank you. I was thrown namely because of the pilot, and because this set looked so much more like a complete thought compared to the one we know from other extant episodes.
-Jason
-
Heck, nothing about Twenty One works
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
-
Heck, nothing about Twenty One works
Sorry, couldn't help myself.
I mean...
-
Related to Scott & Kevin's comments: to this day, I've probably only watched the original Twenty One for a minute or two at a time -- same goes for the Jim Lange pilot. Knowing the episodes were rigged, I didn't feel a desire to watch the choreography play out in real time. That's why I've always been curious how the game would go played under its original rules, legitimately.
-Jason
-
Related to Scott & Kevin's comments: to this day, I've probably only watched the original Twenty One for a minute or two at a time -- same goes for the Jim Lange pilot. Knowing the episodes were rigged, I didn't feel a desire to watch the choreography play out in real time. That's why I've always been curious how the game would go played under its original rules, legitimately.
-Jason
During the days of social distancing when we were all afraid to be in the same room, I set up a Zoom group where we played a different game show home game every night. We played the Twenty One home game a few times...sending a player to the Waiting Room is the isolation booth, so it worked rather nicely as a Zoom game.
My recollection was that it played surprisingly well. The only drawback is that, played legitimately, ties happen FAR less often (I think just one in all the games we played over Zoom) so you don't get what this show was going for, the tension of seeing how long it will take for one player to emerge.
Interesting story about the Jim Lange pilot. I think we've established pretty thoroughly at this point that game show pilots are often rigged for the simple reason of presenting a good game in your sales pitch to a network. Michael Brockman, who was head of CBS at the time, was absolutely adamant that Barry & Enright deliver an unrigged pilot. His recollection was that he told them something to the effect of "Of all the shows you've done, this was the worst choice for a show to revive. The one thing I'm going to ask is that you give me legitimate games in the pilot, because right now, you have no track record or proof that this format works when it's played legitimately."
Barry & Enright delivered a rigged pilot anyway. Brockman was so annoyed by that, he passed and bought Child's Play instead.
-
Of all the shows you've done, this was the worst choice for a show to revive.
Then along came Hot Potato.
right now, you have no track record or proof that this format works when it's played legitimately.
On the contrary, they had proof that the show didn't work when played straight. See the PBS documentary containing an early Twenty One where the contestants missed question after question, precipitating a call from Geritol's ad agency which led to the decision to rig the show.
P+, Mindreaders and Blockbusters were greenlit on the basis of office tun-thrus. Spellbinders and Puzzlers didn't make it past the pilot stage. All-New BTC didn't have a pilot or office run-thru, just an order from CBS.
None of these undertakings were rigged.
-
Interesting story about the Jim Lange pilot. I think we've established pretty thoroughly at this point that game show pilots are often rigged for the simple reason of presenting a good game in your sales pitch to a network. Michael Brockman, who was head of CBS at the time, was absolutely adamant that Barry & Enright deliver an unrigged pilot. His recollection was that he told them something to the effect of "Of all the shows you've done, this was the worst choice for a show to revive. The one thing I'm going to ask is that you give me legitimate games in the pilot, because right now, you have no track record or proof that this format works when it's played legitimately."
Barry & Enright delivered a rigged pilot anyway. Brockman was so annoyed by that, he passed and bought Child's Play instead.
Didn’t realize 21 was for CBS. I always had it in my head it was for syndication, perhaps as a replacement for Bullseye.
Anyway, years ago I remember reading on ATGS that as Jack Barry tried to get back into producing, he came up with a pilot with a “staged” outcome. When pressed about playing it straight he argued it’s a pilot so it shouldn’t matter. Much as I enjoy TJW, his smugness as a host always annoyed me. That and making it seem like that 1982 Chevette on the line was worth a million bucks.
-
his smugness as a host always annoyed me.
I met Jack Barry at NATPE 1976 in San Francisco. I didn't see Enright around but he/they were trying to sell BTB into syndication. I asked him about the format of BTB. He explained that it had nine celebrities "a la Hollywood Squares". He was colder than ice and brusque beyond belief. It gave me the creeps.
Ira Skutch once said, "It could be worse. We could all be working for Jack Barry."
I have to call into question Brockman's story about catching Jack on a ladder backstage at TJW, trying to rig the show by fussing with the scoreboard. First, that's not how you rig a game show, and it would have resulted in a grievance from IATSE.
-
Spellbinders and Puzzlers didn't make it past the pilot stage.
I saw an interview not long ago with Bill Anderson, and he said that Spellbinders was all but sold to NBC, but technical problems with the computers that ran the board caused it to not enter production. Does that jive with what you remember?
Also, the '79 BTC had a pilot that's aired on BUZZR.had a pilot (http://youtu.be/nY5IVqUhZ2w)
-
his smugness as a host always annoyed me.
I have to call into question Brockman's story about catching Jack on a ladder backstage at TJW, trying to rig the show by fussing with the scoreboard. First, that's not how you rig a game show, and it would have resulted in a grievance from IATSE.
Are you sure that’s a story from Brockman, though? He was in charge at ABC during the run of “Joker,” he never had anything to do with that show.
-
Also, the '79 BTC had a pilot that's aired on BUZZR.had a pilot (http://youtu.be/nY5IVqUhZ2w)
It did, but Chris is right, it sold without a pilot. All New Beat the Clock shot three pilots on September 4 and 5, 1979, less than two weeks before the first episode aired. It’s likely that the pilots were just “Let’s make sure we’re happy with what we have” pilots rather than actually trying to sell the show.
-
Are you sure that’s a story from Brockman, though? He was in charge at ABC during the run of “Joker,” he never had anything to do with that show.
Looking at the list of interviews at the Strong museum, I don't know who else would tell a story like that. Certainly not Edd Kalehoff or Peter Marshall. Maybe Ron Greenberg? I don't feel like searching through all of those long interviews to find out. Either way, the story doesn't hold water. The IATSE stage electricians wouldn't have let Jack Barry climb a ladder to futz with the readouts without making a stink. If you want to rig a game show you collude with the contestants to either find out what they know or flat out give them the answers as Enright used to do.
"Pilots" were shot of P+, Mindreaders and Blockbusters. In those days NBC budgeted for three game-show pilots per quarter. I believe those pilots were shot so they would appear on the books as pilots which never aired. It sounds like a mere formality but pilots were considered R&D and as such, the cost of doing a pilot had tax implications as the costs could be deducted as R&D expenses as any business would do. If they aired those shows they wouldn't count as pilots and hence no tax deduction. Otherwise we would have shot five pilots of P+ to fill out an entire week, which we did not do. Functionally they were like dress rehearsals but accounting-wise they were "pilots".
I saw an interview not long ago with Bill Anderson, and he said that Spellbinders was all but sold to NBC, but technical problems with the computers that ran the board caused it to not enter production. Does that jive with what you remember?
Another reason talent isn't necessarily a reliable source. The Spellbinders pilots were shot before I came to work for G-T, though I did fly to L.A. to interview with Ira Skutch. The Ferranti-Packard displays worked just fine for the pilots. Neither NBC nor G-T would scuttle a project costing six figures and let it go to waste because of a computer problem which was fixable. In 1978 they had experience with Ferranti-Packard displays thanks to FF. In the 1950's there were problems with the American Totalizator readouts which affected TPIR pilot but the show went to series anyway. There were also problems with Bill Cullen's mic cable getting stuck in the turntable.
The odd thing about Spellbinders is that they had a music package composed, arranged, performed and recorded for the pilots which didn't go to air. Goodson didn't even recycle it for Child's Play as he did with other music, so either Goodson or NBC took it up the shorts on music for Spellbinders. Contrary to what a certain Oracle of All Things Game Show says, the Child's Play theme was based on "London Bridge", not "Twinkle Twinkle".
-
Anyway, years ago I remember reading on ATGS that as Jack Barry tried to get back into producing, he came up with a pilot with a “staged” outcome. When pressed about playing it straight he argued it’s a pilot so it shouldn’t matter.
Here’s that story (https://web.archive.org/web/20160330071730/http://www.curtalliaume.com/jokers.html), second paragraph in the “background” section.
-
his smugness as a host always annoyed me.
I met Jack Barry at NATPE 1976 in San Francisco. I didn't see Enright around but he/they were trying to sell BTB into syndication. I asked him about the format of BTB. He explained that it had nine celebrities "a la Hollywood Squares". He was colder than ice and brusque beyond belief. It gave me the creeps.
In his interview for the Strong Museum, Wink mentions that he was not fond of Jack. During his years at TTD, he mostly talked with Dan Enright.
-
P+, Mindreaders and Blockbusters were greenlit on the basis of office tun-thrus. Spellbinders and Puzzlers didn't make it past the pilot stage. All-New BTC didn't have a pilot or office run-thru, just an order from CBS.
I saw the pilot for Spellbinders when I was out in L.A. in '78. I'm a pretty good speller, so I liked the game. Bill Anderson did a good job as host. Gene Wood was the announcer and the celebs were CNR and Debralee Scott, though the tickets listed Patty Duke Astin as the female celeb. She cancelled or backed out.
When I heard BTC was coming back in '79, I figured it was for syndication. When I heard it was for CBS, I thought "They actually sold that to a network?" forgetting that it was on CBS all those years ago.
-
In his interview for the Strong Museum, Wink mentions that he was not fond of Jack. During his years at TTD, he mostly talked with Dan Enright.
Geoff Edwards has some stories too from Hollywood's Talking. I guess they patched things up by the time Play the Percentages started...either that or he interacted more with Dan. I think HT was solely a Jack Barry Production.
EDIT: Thanks, Mark. I thought it was Curt's site but couldn't remember.
-
Anyway, years ago I remember reading on ATGS that as Jack Barry tried to get back into producing, he came up with a pilot with a “staged” outcome. When pressed about playing it straight he argued it’s a pilot so it shouldn’t matter.
Here’s that story (https://web.archive.org/web/20160330071730/http://www.curtalliaume.com/jokers.html), second paragraph in the “background” section.
Thanks for the link. I remember reading that on Curt's great site, but only now thought of this. In that game, telling interviewees what to say would have no bearing on the competition, since the contestants hear the same clues and still have to guess the topic. As with Hollywood Squares, it was still too dishonest for Goodson.
-
Another reason talent isn't necessarily a reliable source. The Spellbinders pilots were shot before I came to work for G-T, though I did fly to L.A. to interview with Ira Skutch before they were shot. The Ferranti-Packard displays worked just fine for the pilots.
Chris, any idea of why NBC would pass? They certainly aired crummier games than Spellbinders with far lower production values. If the current management of GSN had been around, they'd have bought it.
-
his smugness as a host always annoyed me.
I have to call into question Brockman's story about catching Jack on a ladder backstage at TJW, trying to rig the show by fussing with the scoreboard. First, that's not how you rig a game show, and it would have resulted in a grievance from IATSE.
Are you sure that’s a story from Brockman, though? He was in charge at ABC during the run of “Joker,” he never had anything to do with that show.
That story is from Fred Silverman in an interview with the Television Academy
-
Chris, any idea of why NBC would pass?
Who knows?
I watched pilot #2 yesterday. It was a bit slow-paced and I don't think CNR was the best choice as a celebrity player. Bill Anderson did a great job.
I don't know what other pilots may have been in competition with it at the time.
-
That story is from Fred Silverman in an interview with the Television Academy
Oh, OK. Thanks for setting the record straight. So I've been rewatching the Brockman interview for nothing — haha! Brockman screws up his answer to a question about the genesis of P+.
-
glad to pitch in
-
For the life of me I can't remember the name (plus I'm eating dinner right now so I'm not in the mood for tearing through notes), but the G-T/Barry rigged game was from 1969. It was one of those "we got filmed answers from kids, so you'll answer these questions based on that". The host was Gene Rayburn and featured what would eventually be The Better Sex end game, with just 13 people rather than 30.
-
Geoff Edwards has some stories too from Hollywood's Talking.
[snippy snip]
I think HT was solely a Jack Barry Production.
I do believe you're right (1973; so I believe it predates Barry's reunion with Enright).
either that or he interacted more with Dan
I believe that was the case; I know I've seen a clip from PTP with Dan actually appearing on camera.
-
That quote from Ira Skutch about rigging pilots has sometimes made me wonder about pilot #2 for “Card Sharks” (which Skutch, admittedly, wasn’t involved in AFAIK):
Johnny “wins” $28,800 in the Money Cards. Since that total happened only once during the actual run of 864 shows, it’s statistically improbable, and brings to mind the possibility of the pilot outcome being manipulated in some way. OTOH, given that there were no real winnings on the line, the contestant may have been more willing to make all-or-nothing bets on the potentially iffy 5 and 10.
-
OTOH, given that there were no real winnings on the line, the contestant may have been more willing to make all-or-nothing bets on the potentially iffy 5 and 10.
I think this is the more pertinent part. Generally speaking, we have more data on the side of Goodson not rigging pilots. While it may have happened here and there, my gut tells me no.
-Jason
-
OTOH, given that there were no real winnings on the line, the contestant may have been more willing to make all-or-nothing bets on the potentially iffy 5 and 10.
I think this is the more pertinent part. Generally speaking, we have more data on the side of Goodson not rigging pilots. While it may have happened here and there, my gut tells me no.
-Jason
I wonder how many 28,800s we had in Palace. I'm sure it was a few.
-
For the life of me I can't remember the name (plus I'm eating dinner right now so I'm not in the mood for tearing through notes), but the G-T/Barry rigged game was from 1969. It was one of those "we got filmed answers from kids, so you'll answer these questions based on that". The host was Gene Rayburn and featured what would eventually be The Better Sex end game, with just 13 people rather than 30.
Well now I'm certainly curious. This sounds exactly like It's Predictable, although the taped answers were of adults and it was taped June '70. Is this what you're recalling or was there in fact a previous attempt with the same format?
-
Related to Scott & Kevin's comments: to this day, I've probably only watched the original Twenty One for a minute or two at a time -- same goes for the Jim Lange pilot. Knowing the episodes were rigged, I didn't feel a desire to watch the choreography play out in real time. That's why I've always been curious how the game would go played under its original rules, legitimately.
Going in with the knowledge that the longest a champion ran on Maury’s run was six games, I think it would have fallen flat. The game as played legit lends itself to blowouts as much as it does nailbiters. Charging players for wrong answers also runs the risk of trying to play catch-up and if you’re in another weak spot you’re going for ten and wrong again, and your opponent wins, unless the same calculus is happening in the other booth.
Tic Tac Dough and Jokers Wild desperately need easy material to put crosses and circles on the board or cash in the bank. The problem 21 runs into is players winning eleven points on a fairly elementary question is likely to turn off people looking for difficulty, and you’re back to the original dilemma.
-
OTOH, given that there were no real winnings on the line, the contestant may have been more willing to make all-or-nothing bets on the potentially iffy 5 and 10.
I think this is the more pertinent part. Generally speaking, we have more data on the side of Goodson not rigging pilots. While it may have happened here and there, my gut tells me no.
-Jason
That pilot show may indeed have been rigged at the insistence of the network, knowing full well that the show could never see air with NBC Compliance and Practices making damn sure it never did.
I've never seen that show. How do the contestants' reactions look? Does he look genuinely surprised or fake surprised?
-
Disclaimer: I have no proof or hard evidence backing up this opinion, just trusting my instincts.
The Money Cards in both pilots seemed to be very, very obviously staged. Pilot #1 had Jack Campion, a fine pilot actor, busting after wagering $8K on the Big Bet.
Pilot #2 had the max win. Without being an expert, it seemed that they staged both to show what "big bust" and "breaking the bank" outcomes looked like.
-
I watched Johnny on CS pilot #2.
He appears to have been instructed to bet his entire wad on each bet. He doesn't agonize or deliberate over any of his bets. He's too cocksure. When he wins the jackpot, he's actor enough to act triumphant even though there was no real money at stake.
-
Coincidentally, I also just rewatched the bonus round to Spellbinders pilot #1.
The contestant handily won the $5K after blazing through the Bar Drinks category immediately guessing some with just the first letter; Pilot #2 still on Winc's channel had the player choke on "Hearts" in the Card Games category.
This also feels like a staged bonus win/loss pilot pair scenario to me. But...maybe the fellow in pilot #1 was just a well-versed drinker :P
Initial impulse though: staged.
-
I watched Johnny on CS pilot #2.
He appears to have been instructed to bet his entire wad on each bet. He doesn't agonize or deliberate over any of his bets. He's too cocksure. When he wins the jackpot, he's actor enough to act triumphant even though there was no real money at stake.
I always got a kick out of him Hi/Low-Fiving Jim as they went to break. Definitely more chummy than usual.
-
I'm on a tear.
I watched the pilots of "On a Roll", "Star Words" and "Top Secret".
Conclusion: I left the game-show business just in time.
-
Pilot #2 still on Winc's channel had the player choke on "Hearts" in the Card Games category.
This also feels like a staged bonus win/loss pilot pair scenario to me.
The "meat sauce" as the first answer given on "Things you eat with spaghetti" seems a little out there too to be genuine.
-
Has anyone watched the "Vingt-et-un" series from Canada? I'm wondering how that fared as a "normal" version of the game show, compared to what we've discussed. I've never seen one episode so I've no idea.
-
Has anyone watched the "Vingt-et-un" series from Canada? I'm wondering how that fared as a "normal" version of the game show, compared to what we've discussed. I've never seen one episode so I've no idea.
Ryan Vickers to the white courtesy phone. :)
-
Has anyone watched the "Vingt-et-un" series from Canada? I'm wondering how that fared as a "normal" version of the game show, compared to what we've discussed. I've never seen one episode so I've no idea.
Ryan Vickers to the white courtesy phone. :)
You rang? :D
Long story short... one season in 2004-05. As a daily show it worked fine... win one was 250$ with win seven being 20 000$ (then back to the start). Bonus game was same as NBC primetime just with two zeroes dropped (ie. 100$ instead of 10 000$). Second chance was in play. If memory serves there were two full games in each show. Points for employing legendary Quebec game show host Guy Mongrain as the moderator.
I had honestly forgotten until recently that I had an audition for this - emailed a test and with x amount of time to complete it (m/c if memory serves... I have a copy of it somewhere but can't find it). Didn't get it but blaq did get on... and as such... blaq to the white courtesy phone :)